I suggest to define the names of the rows: a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, j, k, l, m, n, p, q, r, s, … (excluding “i” and “o”). Then the names of the individual cells would be like in a matrix: j9, b11, c4, ... (sometimes instead of sending diagrams we could talk using this convention).

maartensmit

Posted on:Wed Jun 08, 2011 9:59 pm

Posts: 20Joined: Mon May 16, 2011 5:17 pm

Re: Definition of the names of the cells

Interesting idea, but if you want to use this to replace diagrams, this is going to be a hell of a chaotic way...

_________________Confucius say - 'He who stands on toilet is high on pot.'

I suggest to define the names of the rows: a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, j, k, l, m, n, p, q, r, s, … (excluding “i” and “o”). Then the names of the individual cells would be like in a matrix: j9, b11, c4, ... (sometimes instead of sending diagrams we could talk using this convention).

Yes, good idea, maybe when I find some time I can add a featurewhere those row names and column numbers will be shown.

Although possibly I'll change it to row numbers and column letters (as in chess).

Patrick

honkhonk

Posted on:Fri Jun 10, 2011 4:41 pm

Posts: 36Joined: Fri May 13, 2011 8:23 am

Re: Definition of the names of the cells

Microsoft Excel and OpenOffice Calc also use A,B,C etc for columns and 1,2,3 etc for rows by default (does every spreadsheet type program do?).

Microsoft Excel and OpenOffice Calc also use A,B,C etc for columns and 1,2,3 etc for rows by default (does every spreadsheet type program do?).

Another reason for using row numbers and column letters...

I agree, capital letters for the columns and numbers for the rows, as in Excel (also for Excel users), is perfect. Any convention is welcome, as far as we have a language to refer to specific cells (I made a mistake initially when mentioning a “matrix” since in this case all the elements have the same name “a” (for a matrix "A") with generally numeric subindexes (letters for a tensor, etc.). In the case of chess, the board is looked “from the white pieces” (as commented by fb_1124) but, for the “calcudoker”, the higher and the lower rows are at practically the same distance of the player, so the numbers should run "naturally" up-down. Initially, I was thinking only in the “language” (in abstract) but if in the future (according to Patrick's intention) the names of the cells are shown in the puzzle itself wonderful (suggest on the right upper corner of the cell, small, and like a very light shadow).

... I was thinking only in the “language” (in abstract) but if in the future (according to Patrick's intention) the names of the cells are shown in the puzzle itself wonderful (suggest on the right upper corner of the cell, small, and like a very light shadow).

I was thinking of putting them at the bottom and on the left hand side.In any case, it'll be a feature that you can switch on and off (and off by default).

Patrick

sneaklyfox

Posted on:Sat Jun 11, 2011 1:51 pm

Posts: 422Location: CanadaJoined: Fri May 13, 2011 12:43 am

Re: Definition of the names of the cells

pnm wrote:

I was thinking of putting them at the bottom and on the left hand side.In any case, it'll be a feature that you can switch on and off (and off by default).

Patrick

Good call to make it a feature that can be switched on and off. I agree that it's better to put it off to the side instead of each individual cell. If the numbers will be increasing from bottom to top like in chess then having the letters and numbers on the bottom and left side is good. Unless it's more like Excel where the numbers increase from top to bottom then perhaps it's better to make the letters for the columns appear at the top.

Although I like chess convention, it's probably better to use the Excel convention in this case since people actually use Excel to solve their puzzles and also the "cursor" always starts in the most upper-left cell so we can call that A1.